Posts Tagged ‘freedom’

A New Leaf

20 February 2018
fruit tree shoot

Springtime in Seattle, 2012.

In English we have an expression “turn over a new leaf” which means to make a new start. It literally refers to a page in a book, but of course this meaning of leaf is closely related to the one illustrated above.

As has already been mentioned in the previous post, my desire to build a new relationship with my church led me to the realization that my public-facing communications could use a change of context.

The Situation

Early this lifetime I came to a conclusion that I hope most can agree on: There is a situation on this planet. Situation is here defined as a major departure from the ideal scene.

In my younger years (the early 1960s) I was under the impression that we as a nation (the U.S.A.), if not the entire planet, were working towards an ideal scene. Here it is as expressed in one of our founding documents:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Then near the end of 1963 a duly elected – and rather popular – President was shot to death in public during a parade while he was visiting a city in Texas. A new administration took over from that man, which resulted in our country becoming very deeply involved in Vietnam, a war Kennedy hoped could be kept under control using only Special Forces troops. As more and more of our men died there, our involvement in the war in Vietnam became more and more unpopular, and was finally ended. The “Communists” then won the war, because they were more sensible rulers than those left in power by earlier colonizers and other outside interests.

Our government had immensely failed in effecting our “safety and happiness.” That failure was so obvious, it’s almost as if it was planned; and it may well have been.

To this day, there are huge holes in our understanding of what was really going on during the first half of the 20th century. And those holes only increased in size when we tried to look at and understand more recent events.


One person – with his group – was working to fill those holes with data that might actually be helpful to people. However, his communication line to the public was cut by mass media outlets controlled by men allied with psychiatry, which opposed this man and what he was teaching. This is known data, not supposition.

So an office in the Church created its own communication line to the public, and called it Freedom Magazine. Many of the first articles in that magazine were penned by L. Ron Hubbard himself. He wanted the general public to begin to notice the connection between what psychiatry (as a movement) was doing and saying across the planet and what was happening to us here in the U.S. Some did. Freedom Mag’s message, though, did not reach me until years later.

In the early 1980s I finally learned that the psychiatry or “Mental Health” movement was being pushed forward by men who shared certain personality traits than most of us would recognize as insane or psychotic. Furthermore, as anti-Scientologists they definitely qualified as Suppressive Persons.

It was our challenge, then, (in the political sphere) to somehow remove those people from the communication lines of the planet. In the early years, those lines consisted mostly of English-language newspapers. Later those lines became dominated by radio and television. And now, since the the 1990s or so, we also have the internet which now feeds into a vast network of mobile “smart” phones.

These communication networks are not evil in themselves, but the persistent attempts by persons of criminal intent to dominate those lines has drastically reduced their usability (and believability) to the point that many people – including many Scientologists – will not use those lines for anything other than gathering the most mundane forms of information, or commercial uses like shopping and banking.

The Search for Reliable Information

I didn’t get on the internet in any big way until 2009. Wikipedia was already very well-developed by that time and had become the de facto source of information about almost anything. However, on topics where facts or intentions are hotly contested, the “establishment” position tends to win out on Wikipedia, on TED, on all the major news sites, or any site attempting to present reliable information. This goes for almost any topic other than the most mundane (weather forecasts?) or boring (electronics and coding?).

What I did at that time was to start my own blog. There I would present and compare data from multiple sources in the hopes of giving readers a more insightful view of things than what was being fed to them by the mainstream sources.

This activity had two main problems: 1) nobody read it, and 2) too many of my non-church data sources were questionable or salted with anti-Scientology sentiments. I was trying to demonstrate to my readers that there existed certain basic phenomena of life that were widely agreed on and widely researched. Yet I kept falling over enemy data that had been insinuated into many of my “alternative” sources. Many involved in that work were only too eager to believe that Scientology was just another con game that could be dismissed and not taken seriously.

The Church, for its part, decided to buy an entire studio complex in Hollywood – a location I am very familiar with that used to house a local Public Television station – and set up its own content generation facilities and media channels. This project is on the verge of launching as I write.

My own response is to revise my site to make it more resource-oriented and less discussion-oriented. I am also beginning a project to connect to like-minded bloggers.

Technical Limitations

The internet was created to provide its initial users (mostly data scientists in academia and the military-industrial complex) with faster data sharing capabilities, which data might include – in the case of the military – strategic and actionable data of a confidential nature.

Some of the earliest websites looked basically like search windows and were used to find scientific papers and other technical information, somewhat on the order of a giant library.

Additionally, any services that earlier used telex lines were obvious candidates for switching over to the internet. This included news feeds, stock tickers, and private messaging of course.

But it was not long before commerce was being conducted over the internet, and this use quickly became the dominant use. About 1/2 of all internet websites today are .com sites. And this means that what most website designers are trying to do is maximize traffic. Today, social networking is widely understood as a way to give commercial sites access to a lot of potential customers. The sharing of useful information on the internet, its original educational use, has been buried under all the subsequent traffic; a development that should have been quite predictable.

The blog is a sort of personal news feed service. It presents your posts in reverse chrono order, most recent on top, like the news. “Free” blogs are used – often blatantly – for advertising, and so are “free” e-mail and social media accounts.

About two-thirds (68%) of internet users disapprove of search engines and websites tracking their online behavior for the purpose of ad targeting.
– Pew Research, 13 March 2012.

While internet shopping is very popular compared to using the internet to seek useful data or advice (except as it concerns which product to buy), many people use the internet for that purpose or assume that it can be used that way. This group especially includes young people in school. I know it also includes all sorts of engineers and other “geek” types.

People want good data, but the internet concentrates on giving them news, blogs, ads and messages commonly associated with entertainment or commerce, not associated with making smart decisions.

Thus if I want to use my blog to help people make smarter decisions in their lives, I must realize that this is not what my blog was designed to do, and I am going to need to compensate for that.

The changes I will be making in the site reflect that realization.


Richard Stallman and Freedom

15 November 2017

Today (Wednesday, 15th Nov 2017) I went to see Richard Stallman give a presentation on Free Software.

He was being hosted by a California State project to re-write the Child Welfare website (including backend) using Free Software. Most of the attendees were state employees involved in the project. I was there because I had gotten an email about the event from the Free Software Foundation. Though rain clouds threatened, I went ahead and made the approximately 10 mile bike ride over to Natomas where the state government has a bunch of buildings in a nice industrial park.

Richard is about 1-1/2 years older than me. He was born in New York City (per Wikipedia) and acts like it. He became proficient in writing computer programs while in high school, and was working as a programmer even as he continued his education.

In his early years, he worked at MIT’s Artificial Intelligence laboratory, then funded largely through DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency).

As software and computing became more popular, Richard noticed that most companies were keeping their code (the higher-language representation of the program) secret. He objected to this on the grounds that in a free society, code should be published like other forms of literature, so it could be studied and learned from.

He started integrating his ideas into a coherent ideology with the birth of the GNU project in 1983. The NU in GNU stands for “not Unix” which was meant to emphasize that the GNU system was all Free Software, though it functioned a lot like Unix. Beyond that, the gnu is a native name for the African wildebeest, which is used as the project’s mascot.

At the presentation today, Richard went through his basic philosophy about Free Software and gave some examples of how proprietary software has been used against the higher cause of freedom in society.

Is it really all about profit?

Richard thinks that the existence of non-free or anti-freedom software can be explained by profit motive. This has been a common argument from “progressive” circles concerning many political and economic weaknesses. I think this is not an intellectually rigorous explanation.

I don’t say that because I’m so smart. I am simply aware of research that points to other factors.

But I will say this about profit:
In a political-economic context, profit is seen as necessary in order to retain investors. Who would invest in an activity that couldn’t repay the investment, with interest? Beyond the fact that this itself is a weak argument, I also see it as unnecessarily complex.

What a business has to do first to pay a profit to shareholders is to have more income than expenses. But that is just common sense. In a world of machines – and biological entities are a type of machine – you need to put more energy into the system than you will get out as work. The remainder is waste energy, which is used by biology but “dumped” by most machine systems.

If you can make more than you spend, you can pay investors a profit. Or on the scale of a single human being, you can save for a child’s education, or for old age. And by the way, did you include raising a family in your list of expenses? So, we have pressures on the producers in an economy to “make a profit” whether it’s their stockholders or their children that they are responsible to.

I believe this basically evaporates the argument of “profit motive.”


What we have left, though, is something very obvious that the “progressives” don’t talk much about: Criminality.

As I am “musing” in this article I will opine on why the “progressives” have this problem. My theory – and not just mine, nor my origination particularly – is that an approach to life commonly referred to as “psychology” has infiltrated its way into American life, and the “progressive” movement in particular. It is not that there is something wrong with the study of the mind. It is only that the history of this particular brand of psychology we are seeing on Earth suggests it was financed and supported, if not actually created, by persons who wished to develop a sort of intellectual framework, or propaganda mechanism, that would serve to explain or justify “bad” behavior anywhere from mildly rude to morally reprehensible.

What has arisen from this effort is a jumble of loosely-related ideas, including concepts like Moral Relativism, and Situational Ethics. The bulk of these concepts are confused and under-developed, but when paired up with Psychology as our best attempt to understand human thought and behavior, they can establish a basis to justify almost any action, no matter how evil.

In short, the criminal – especially one in government or business – has a problem: How can I harm those around me while maintaining my supposedly legitimate position in society? And I am saying that one answer he has reached for was: Use Psychology.

In this wise, a criminal is explained as a person in a “bad” situation, or someone who was brought up wrong. In a company it could be someone being forced to make a profit, resulting in his making very bad choices. The answer is to be kind to everybody and make sure everyone has enough to eat, spend etc. This argument is warm and fuzzy, but I think demonstrably unworkable.

If the criminal is really a type of personality, like the psychopath of classic psychiatry (now called “psychodynamic theory”), then being kind to him will not change his behavior. He has a compulsive urge to harm secretly. Thus, my theory that modern “psychology” was produced by and for criminals, as it fails miserably to solve the problem of crime (when it addresses it directly at all).

Modern “psychology” totally ignores past lives and their influence on present-life behavior, even though this has been the most productive research avenue during the previous century that yielded new understandings about human behavior.


A very major segment of the people I have been exposed to who are out there communicating ideas seem to believe that to make a person aware of a sub-standard behavior will lead to correction.

I don’t know why this idea remains so strong in people, as I see almost no support for it in the extreme cases where self-correction has been most needed and most lacking.

One example of this type of thinking is gun control. What gun control advocates seem to be saying is that if we make certain types of guns illegal or difficult to obtain, a person who wishes he could go out and blow everybody’s head off will become aware that this is wrong behavior and self-correct into some more acceptable approach. This idea is totally ridiculous.

Yet a progressive-oriented person like Richard Stallman, as fine and upstanding as his ideas are, thinks that if we just make Free Software more popular, those using anti-free software will eventually self-correct and see the error of their ways. If that were to really happen, purveyors of anti-free software might give in, simply on the basis that they could no longer sell their products to anyone. But what I am suggesting is that the criminals among them would not self-correct. They would just find alternative methods to perform criminal acts and protect their secrets.

What anti-free is really all about

Mr. Stallman, as well as many on the “right” who argue for more freedom, are not aware of the research I am aware of, I am quite sure. And while I may not be able to explain that research with total clarity here, I do think it is worth our while to at least be aware of it.

LRH began to speak of it in the 1950s, and continued to mention it now and again into the 1960’s. His famous training lecture “The Free Being” dates from 1963.

A free being is a being that doesn’t need a body to operate through. And such beings, unfortunately, have a history of acting somewhat inconsiderately towards people walking around in bodies. The free being didn’t realize these people were basically the same order of being as he was, except trapped in their bodies. So these societies of beings in bodies learned how to trap free beings. They saw it as a survival point. Aptitude in this activity was something to be proud of. And the free beings of this universe finally all became trapped in bodies, like everyone else, and being “free” the way free beings were became totally unacceptable. This was hammered into the populations by their managers as a primary rule of life! Free beings had caused them so many problems; nobody stopped to think that they might be spiritual brothers.

But there were always some in every society who insisted on working to be “more free.” Were these the ones who used to be free, their memories of past happy days leaking through the various mental trapping mechanisms? Perhaps. But what was important was that those societies couldn’t tolerate such people. And they would go out on programs to scoop them up and dump them someplace where they could do no harm to anyone, like Earth.

It seems this dumping operation was rather hit-and-miss. Perhaps it was carried out mostly as a PR campaign to impress populations. Because we sure have a jumble of different personalities and approaches on this planet now!

The point is that “psychology” never figured all this out. The ideas and methodologies that did figure it out have been around for over 50 years. They were rejected by psychology. Why? Probably because they could lead to greater freedom! But also because psychology was being influenced by criminals, who are extremely afraid of freedom. Not just mentally dull about it; VERY afraid of it. A free being – though it has some historic outpoints – can also see through any secret, rendering a criminal helpless. This may be the bigger reason that criminals are involved in anti-free technologies, software being just one of them.

It was good to see Richard Stallman. I had heard a lot about him over the years. His heart is in a good place, but I don’t think his solutions will get society where he’d like it to go. He needs to understand it better first. Anti-free is more deeply entrenched in the minds of men – and particularly managers – than he realizes. The solutions exist at a deeper level than he is currently aware of. That they exist in any form at all is a minor miracle.

Food and Travel with Anthony Bourdain

4 October 2016

After a second exposure to Bourdain’s shows during a layover at the bus station in Portland, I wanted to write a bit about these shows.

For some reason, his Parts Unknown show on Libya, which dates from 2013, was being re-broadcast that day in Portland. I also saw his show on Istanbul (Turkey).

Some time ago I’d seen at least one of his shows featuring Chinese foods.

On this more recent occasion, I’d just finished eating a very decent hamburger at the new café at the Portland bus station, and had also gone through 3 brochures printed for travelers which – who couldn’t guess – all focused on food.

The show on Libya was blatantly anti-Gaddafi, portraying him as a hopelessly misled and ruthless dictator. The more basic fact is that Gaddafi was anti-West. If you look at what the West has done during its period of dominance over the planet, and where Gaddafi lived (in an Arab nation), this attitude would not be unexpected.

The Istanbul show was very unsure about the “goodness” of Erdoğan, and sympathetic to the Kurds. Erdoğan, for his part, has been vacillating in his support of NATO, particularly after learning that they may have had something to do with the recent coup attempt.

The West’s War of Ideas

The tactic that has been followed by the West in its conquest of the planet is to portray its opponents as “anti-freedom” rather than anti-West, and to fight against them on the basis that they are “bad” rather than that they are simply enemies. Over the centuries of European expansion into other areas of the planet, this tactic has taken many forms. It was particularly convoluted when it turned against other Europeans, such as the Germans before, through, and after WWII. In many times and places it was eventually backed away from, such as in the American colonies and later in countries like India. But this only meant that the intention to hold sway over these areas became more understated, or covert.

What is really exactly happening on the planet remains subject to debate, as no facts seem clear enough to be totally persuasive. But I find the whole argument regarding how the media (print, radio, TV, internet) has been subverted by these European-centered interests to be very persuasive. Thus on a secondary (if not primary) level, shows like Bourdain’s become propaganda vehicles for the West’s viewpoint on life and politics.

Travel and Food

The Western idea of a “successful” person is one who can enjoy travel and food in his older years, if not during his entire life. Anthony fits this definition and thus becomes a role model (winning valence) to be imitated. His neo-liberalism then comes along as part of the package. It is a basically synthetic attitude that the entertainment industry likes to develop in its celebrities to convince us that there are no higher awarenesses worth pursuing. This limits us to the lesser games of liberal-versus-conservtive, or progressive-versus-traditionalist.

Until I was introduced to Hubbard’s work, I was convinced that the game of life was limited roughly as stated above. My only problem was that the managing groups were obviously lying to us about some things, and I could not understand why. There also seemed to be a lot more violence going on than was really necessary.


To go where you want and eat what you want are considered the ultimate attributes of freedom in the West. If this means you kill a few basically innocent people along the way, that fact has no basic bearing on the overall facts concerning how the game of life is limited. Or so we are being told.

What Hubbard taught is that a higher-level game of life has been operating for a very long time, and that our managers have an interest in keeping us unaware of this.

At the higher levels, management as we know it becomes unnecessary or irrelevant. If we were to aspire to these higher levels, what would our managers do? The most entrenched among them are hopeless to the point of total unknowing on the possibility of moving themselves up to a higher level of game. Thus, if some of us were able to achieve this state, it would appear to them as a threat to their very existence (which it would not actually be). So, they reactively – if not consciously – oppose any trend towards an awareness of the higher levels of the game. And their “enemies” have become anyone with an interest in working at those higher levels.

Thus their “enemies” become anyone with a serious interest in higher spiritual abilities. That includes all the followers of the more ancient teachings – mostly the aboriginal peoples of this planet – as well as various renegade groups within the framework of monotheism as well as beyond it, and their attempts to re-invent religion or spiritual practice into something more workable and true to genuine human aspirations.

The handling for these “enemies” has been to invent various pretexts for going to war with them and killing them off. That this has not in fact been very effective does not seem to phase the managers; they have no other “solution” to this “problem.”

The Role of Aesthetics in Propaganda

Aesthetics are needed to give the basically low-awareness propaganda of the managers of the West an appeal to their target audiences, those who seek a higher awareness. You can just lie to the others and they will accept it. To convince this target audience is a little more tricky.

Anthony’s shows are examples of this use of aesthetics. They are very artfully shot, and very carefully assembled. All aesthetic aspects are given attention, including the artfulness of the food itself, and the places being visited. The sound track, the music; they are all carefully put together for every show. This type of treatment has always been a “hook” to help pull in the seekers of higher awareness.

Do ordinary people who have lost interest in higher realms watch Anthony’s shows? I doubt it. But a lot of people who have been asking questions and playing around with spiritual ideas do watch his shows, I bet. These are people still on the fence, unsure of themselves spiritually. There are a lot of them and they are important politically. Liberated, they are capable of getting a lot of good done. Captive, they are capable of preventing a lot from getting done. The old-line managers want to keep these people on their side. And the new-line groups want to add these people to their ranks more than any other type of person.

The Future

What we all face, of course, is the future. What Scientologists, and many others to a lesser extent, know is that we will be in that future. We may or may not forget who we were before. We may or may not have the same adventurous approach to life we chose this lifetime. But – good or bad – we will be there. So we are intimately connected to the future on a long-term basis, not just in the context of one lifetime, or the lifetimes of our children.

The materialists and fence-sitters are unsure of this at best, and totally unaware of this at worst. They are turning away from the whole subject of responsibility, even if their own future experience is at stake. They can’t allow themselves to believe that they could be that responsible.

Some posit this as a “war.” But that is only true on the lower levels. The truth of the situation is that those who want to “ascend” cannot do so simply by “getting rid” of those who don’t want to. In the short term, it is highly advisable to minimize one’s exposure to such people (one reason I don’t watch television as a habit). But in the long term, we will have to bring them all along with us, or they will return later to try again to pull us back down again. So, it would not be incorrect to characterize this as a “struggle.” LRH has described it as “a game where everyone wins.” Well, they know that there are always losers in a game. LRH posits that the loser in this case is the “bank” (that portion of the mind that produces non-survival ideas and actions). But most people are as yet unaware that this exists as something separate from themselves. That problem defines the first hurdle in this struggle.

On the other side of this struggle lies a future that is difficult for most to even imagine. It involves a knowing and causative separation from the physical world, including the physical forms of life (biology, etc.), yet the probable indefinite continuation of the physical world in some form. It involves a knowing conviction of our own immortality without necessarily totally turning away from the various “thrills” of physicality. It involves ideas and experiences which we have – in theory – never experienced before, which would be entirely new.

For me right now, the most important thing that future holds is an abiding respect for truth; an end to all the fouler forms of secrecy and deception; and a chance for great happiness for every being who desires it.

Could Anthony and his show exist in this future? It probably could. But it would be minus the lies and pretense that encumber it now. After all, there are a lot of “parts unknown” left in this universe! We can’t all visit all of them ourselves. Or could we?

My Take on Cloud Atlas

8 December 2012

Cloud Atlas is a novel that was turned into a movie by the Wachowski brothers (Matrix) with the help of another director and independent funding, including a contribution from the German government. It was all shot in Germany.

I have not read the novel. I saw the movie on the evening of Saturday December 1st in Portland. I then read the Wikipedia article on it.

The book, I get the impression, was divided up into six stories, starting with one set in the 1800s. In the movie, an “ensemble” of actors play various roles in different stories, and the stories are intermixed. You get the impression that various characters in different times and places are actually the same spiritual being, because those characters are played by the same actor. I don’t know how this is handled in the book.

The Stories

The stories start in the 1800s with a tale involving a sailing trip. We see a young man concluding a business agreement with someone in a tropical country. As they tour the plantation, the young man witnesses a whipping and faints. He is then put under the charge of a doctor who decides to slowly poison him and blame it on a tropical disease, in order to get his hands on the young man’s valuables. Meanwhile, the slave who was whipped has stowed away in the young man’s cabin, and appears – asking for his help to prove himself capable of been a free man. The young man agrees and the slave wins his freedom. At the end of the voyage, the ex-slave discovers the doctor’s plot and kills the doctor. The young man survives, reunites with his young wife, who he had been corresponding with during his voyage, and they renounce her father, who does business with slave owners, and leave to become abolitionists.

The next story, a tad unrelated to the first, is set in the early 1900s. It involves an aspiring musician who has a taste for sex with his own gender. This musician succeeds in gaining access to a failed composer and ghost-writing several pieces for him, which brings him back to fame. He then writes his own piece, which he calls the “Cloud Atlas Sextet,” and determines to promote it on his own – regardless of his agreement with the composer. When the composer tries to stop him from doing this, the musician shoots him (but doesn’t kill him) and then must hide out from the law until he finishes his piece. He then kills himself, leaving the publishing of the work to his male lover.

Following this story we have one set in the 1970s. A young woman investigative journalist runs across a plot to allow a nuclear reactor to blow up, giving nuclear power a bad name. It seems to be funded by oil interests. Everyone who helps her loses their lives. She is helped by a security officer for the nuclear power company who knew her father. They are pursued by a professional assassin, but with the help of a Latino lady he is killed.

The next story takes place in more or less the present time. A failing book publisher runs into financial luck when one of his authors notoriously kills a book critic at a party. The publisher is now pursued by thugs sent by a creditor, and goes to his brother to ask for help. His brother, in the guise of helping him, gets him locked up in a high-security old folks home. He then plans and carries out an escape with three others who also value their freedom. Their pursuers get beaten up by a bunch of soccer fans in a pub where they go to celebrate their escape. In a somewhat separate story line, we see this publisher writing about this whole adventure. He is writing what seems to be a screenplay for a movie. In this story he redeems himself in the eyes of the lover of his youth, and they reunite to live happily.

The next story happens approximately 100 years forward from the last. It is set in Korea (Seoul) and depicts an automated civilization in which bodies are manufactured and killed (then recycled into food and more bodies) at the whim of the controlling group. The slave masters seem to have won with finality. But they rule over a decaying and war-torn world, and the urge to be free has not died. One slave asserts her independence one day and is killed by her handlers in public. Another slave, seeing this, feels the need to escape. She is assisted in this by a member of the resistance movement who shows her how the system really works (the recycling of dead bodies). She agrees to broadcast an announcement for the resistance over a hacked communication channel, and thus wins public fame. She is then captured and killed, after being interrogated by an “archivist.”

The final story is set in a post-apocalyptic land where peaceful people try to protect themselves from cannibalistic marauders who ride horses. An ET, stranded on earth with a small crew, persuades one of the peaceful ones to assist her to locate an old communications station located on top of a mountain. The station, it turns out, is called Cloud Atlas. They finally locate the station and contact her planet, which then sends out a rescue ship. But meanwhile the man’s village has been attacked by the cannibals, and all killed save one little girl who successfully hid herself. With the help of the ET woman, the man and girl escape. Through this whole story, the man is plagued by a “ghost” in a top hat which tries to get him to do the wrong thing instead of the right thing. But the ET’s love and determination to survive is stronger than the ghost, and the man’s evil intentions are finally overcome.

The Ensemble

The cast of characters is lead by Tom Hanks, who plays the evil doctor in the first story and the man who helps the ET in the last story. In between he plays several other characters who struggle with their moral choices, including the criminal who kills the book critic.

Another main character is the ET woman played by Halle Berry. She also plays the young abolitionist in the first story, a daughter of the composer in the second story, and the reporter in the third story. This being, then, remains pure throughout the entire piece.

Hugo Weaving, of Matrix fame (Agent Smith), plays a string of bad guys, including the 1970’s hired assassin. He seems to be a being thoroughly caught up in the various games of power and unwilling or unable to free himself.

An oriental actress Doona Bae plays the girl who marries the young man in the first story, the Latino woman, and the slave girl in New Seoul. She is a parallel to the Halle Berry character in many ways, but more caught up in the system.

Another set of important characters are those played by the black actors Keith David and David Gyasi. These include the slave in the first story, the man who helped the reporter in the third story, and one of the ETs in the last story. Here are competent beings who have principles and are willing to live by them.

Hugh Grant also plays many roles, usually someone “successful” but with compromised principles. He plays these roles strongly, and I had difficulty knowing what to think about these characters. They achieve a kind of “freedom” for themselves by playing within the system, but they don’t seem happy; they know they have betrayed their own integrity.


My Scientologist friends told me “you have to see Cloud Atlas – it’s about past lives!” Well, it is, kind of. But I would not describe it that way. I think it uses the idea of past lives as a way to explain the continuity of human experience over extended periods of time. And this is a very valid explanation. But the film does not dwell on it.

What the film does dwell on is the continued and persistent arrogance of the “dominant” race on earth (oddly, the only race with recessive genes for skin color) to maintain power through any convenient myth that they can appropriate, but particularly the genetics myth, and what has become known as “social Darwinism.” This manifests as a teaching that society is the way it is because it was meant to be that way.

In opposition to this is the shared urge towards freedom of all people. This urge is not handled carefully or finely in this film, but rather coarsely. It deserves more contemplation than this movie gave it, yet I suppose we should be grateful that it appeared as a theme at all.

A dominant, but to me unwanted, theme in this movie was the topic of sexual confusion. We had the gay composer, his lover who played a woman in another story, and various other crossed-sex roles, such as Susan Sarandon playing a technologist in New Seoul. It is not that this topic is unworthy, but that it was used in this film as a way to make the story line even more confusing than it already was. It is quite true that the fact of past lives can indeed cause gender confusion in people. But that connection was not dealt with in this story.


The urge towards freedom did not win out in these stories; the urge to find a mate and reproduce did. And that, again, is genetics.

Genetics is also very involved in the various New Age teachings, and in most of the “channeled” material being presented to us.

They want us to focus on the “problem” of genetics, which I believe is a manufactured problem. Like the “problem” of Mid-East terrorists, or “global warming”. These problems have been manufactured by the power structure to keep us attached to their game. All these subjects ARE problems – for THEM! It is their genetics that are failing, their lives and property being endangered by criminal elements, and their planet – which they think they own – being threatened by cosmic shifts that they have little or no control over.

But the big problem for the rest of us, I believe, is actually freedom. This whole power game being played on this planet by what are basically a collection of criminal groups has the rest of us all caught up in activities that we would rather have no part of – be free of. War, murder, robbery are not things that suit most of us. Yet on a planet ruled by criminals, these activities become commonplace.

Routes to freedom

So, what do we desire to be free of? First and foremost, we desire freedom from these criminals and their destructive games. And this reduces to freedom from the criminal mind (as played by the “ghost” in this movie). This is something that Scientology offers us. Any spiritual practice worth the name would offer something similar. And they all do. I have attached myself to Scientology because I think it is actually delivering real freedom to beings. Because of this, I think it deserves our support. Not our blind support, but our informed support.

At this time, many of us are not in a financial position to afford professional Scientology services. But most of us could afford to buy the books and study them, and even some of the lectures. Those who have done so at least have an idea of what the subject is, and what its technologies can and can’t do. I think it is worth doing. I know of no other spiritual subject that has advanced to the point of practical application, as Scientology has. There may be something in this subject that could assist you. You will never know if you don’t study it.

Do you want a future such as the one portrayed in Cloud Atlas? This year is only 2012. We still have time to change the course of events. There is much to learn about freedom, and if you desire it you owe it to yourself to learn more about it.

Uncomfortably Close: Case Study in Suppression

28 August 2012

…I would point out that these stories avail the reader with a unique opportunity to see how an insane person operates when given executive authority and what can happen as a result.

My Church Speaks Out

(I link to the actual source articles in my other blog, to encourage readers to visit it.)

In the not-too-distant past, my church published a series of articles through its public-facing magazine Freedom. These concern the activities of several ex-staff, in particular a man named Mark “Marty” Rathbun.

You can read about his and the others’ exploits in the articles, if you wish. My purpose here is to point out a few bits of data revealed in these articles by way of demonstrating how difficult this problem is to get under control.

Tell the Truth

It is a basic teaching in Scientology that with honesty comes success. It is necessary for a preclear to be honest with his or her auditor for case progress to be made, and it is necessary for staff members to be honest with each other for an organization to prosper and expand.

And for a society to work, it is necessary for the information it uses to operate on be as truthful as possible. Can you imagine a nation deciding to attack another country based on information that said country had attacked it, or was about to, and then later learning that this information was totally false? What loss of energy and life could occur as the result of such an untruth! Such things have happened on this planet. And this is why it is so important for the news media of a society to seek truth in its reporting. Those organizations have a huge responsibility to society in this regard. That responsibility is currently being neglected.

Men or women who are afraid to be truthful, who lie to protect their personal interests, or who compulsively deceive others in the fancied belief that this is necessary to survival, are the enemies of peace, progress, prosperity, and understanding on earth (or anywhere else). It behooves any group of any size to have a way to detect such persons and remove them from the vital communication lines of the group, so that their lies do not impede, damage, or destroy the group. These articles from my church vividly point this out.

If you agree with these basic principles, I urge you to lend your support to these values by composing a tweet to this effect and including hashtag #GUYTTT.

How much to tell?

We have all made embarrassing mistakes that we would prefer not be widely known. What is the make-break point between privacy and a criminal cover-up?

If a datum, revealed, would do little more than ruin a reputation or compromise one’s personal security (such as your PIN numbers) then it should be protected. Only criminals would seek and use such data, and there is a word for that: Blackmail.

But if you have done something that will affect your family, your group, your country or your planet, it is your responsibility to make that known and take corrective action.

An honest being who does this as a habit need not go public with every error. It is only necessary to inform those who need to know in order to implement a corrective handling. If one of those turns out to be part of the problem, then that person may use your admission to get rid of you. Well, if that is how that group operates, then you are better off not being a member. These articles reveal how a church executive, in attempting to cover his own butt, got several innocent staff members fired or demoted. You can imagine how destructive this could be.

If a whole planet operated that way, you could have a real problem. I hope it will not get to that here on earth.

What causes dishonesty?

To say that dishonesty is a sign of moral weakness may be true, but is not a very useful observation. If we assume that people are natively quite moral (and we have every reason to believe this) then there must be some process by which they lose this quality, when they do.

Well, this is one of the subjects that Scientology addresses.

This article is not meant to be a Scientology lesson. However, the Freedom articles point out some interesting facts which are worth mentioning.

Trauma in the Womb

The church was able to learn that Marty’s mother, when pregnant with him, had been subjected to Electro-convulsive Therapy (ECT). Shock therapy in itself is a considerable crime against the body and the spirit, as it has no purpose but to injure. But to do it on a pregnant woman? That should be a felony!

If you have ever read Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health you know why. The fetus shares in all its mother’s experiences!

Study problems

In Scientology, knowing how to study is considered very important, and all members must take a course in this. On this course, we learn that going by a misunderstood word will tend to make the student feel blank, then lose interest. Subsequently the student may try to remove themselves from the subject being studied by falling asleep or physically leaving. There is a whole page in Freedom Magazine devoted to how often Mike Rinder would fall asleep. Any Scientologist would suspect from this that he had major unhandled misunderstood words.

Scientology organizations are designed to detect and handle problems such as severe case problems or study problems. But the system relies on the willingness of the person having problems to be corrected. If a staff member is trying to protect certain secrets, he may be able to successfully refuse technical help by claiming he is “too busy on important actions” to spend the time to get fixed up. If it gets to that, such a staff member is nearing the end. His secrets will eventually come out, unless he successfully departs before he is asked to come clean.

And the non-Scientology world?

Much of the non-Scientology world turns to the fields of psychology, psychiatry and neuroscience for the answers to its problems with dishonesty.

Of these three disciplines, only psychology (literally “study of the spirit”) has a chance of finding the answer. And so far, it has not, being bullied by psychiatry to be “scientific” and so turn its back on the very subject (the spirit) that holds the answers to these questions.

Psychiatry has never been an honest subject, the province of witch doctors and mind control experts since the very dawn of time. Neuroscience has been dragged into the mud by psychiatry. At one time it came close to discovering the spiritual nature of the mind, but was shamed into turning away from such ideas.

Uncomfortably Close

I was in the Sea Org during the same years that Mike and Marty were considered very important people in the church. I knew their faces and have been in the same room with both of them briefly. It is awful for me to learn what has become of them.

L. Ron Hubbard’s leadership style was based on trust, and giving able people a second chance. Some would say this is a weakness in the church. But I don’t think so. For on the other side of trust is the truth. The Sea Org has thousands of members. They are trusted to do their jobs, and most of them do. By doing their jobs they prove they are worthy of that trust. And those who fail in their jobs prove that they were not worthy. If they had not at first been trusted, the truth about them would not have emerged.

No one in an organization, nor in life, is expected to be perfect. But for life and groups to work, trust must be granted so that the trustworthy can be identified. If you are trusted with a job, and learn to do it well, you earn a place of respect in the group or in life. If you betray that trust, instead of honestly admitting your mistakes or weaknesses, then respect for you lessens. That is how things must be.

Tell the Truth Movement

31 July 2012

“Tell the truth” is an effort to create a viral movement on the web. – Me

My main article about this is on my newer blog here.

It explains to some extent how I got the idea for starting a Twitter “movement” scheduled to continue through to the end of this year.

The idea is a little whimsical, but it was born out of a desire to do – something.

From the point of view of someone who was raised to be honest, then later worked for over 25 years an a group that understands the spiritual dynamics of dishonesty, as well as the more practical results, I walked back into a society that is obviously…

…built on lies.

When you build a whole civilization on false premises, those who dwell in it can come to find themselves in a very difficult condition. When things go wrong, they are virtually helpless to correct the situation. Because they will be lied to about what caused the problem, will believe the lies, and then will work to correct a wrong target, which will only result in another situation for the group – often much worse than the first.

To demand the truth…

…is only the first step in a potentially quite long process of repair. And of course, there is no guarantee that just because truth is demanded, that truth is what will be delivered.

But, if nothing else, my “movement” serves as a clean statement of purpose. Survival, and beyond that, abundance, depends on those trying to survive having access to true data. Thus “tell the truth” equates, roughly, to “we want life” “we want prosperity” “we want happiness” and “we want peace.” It is a demand that is sufficiently challenging to, perhaps, improve the honesty and responsibility even of those making the demand. And that is very very key.

I hope the idea catches on.

Is Democracy an Illusion?

3 July 2012

“The time has come,” the Walrus said,
“To talk of many things:
Of shoes–and ships–and sealing-wax–
Of cabbages–and kings–…
Lewis Carroll – Through the Looking-Glass and What Alice Found There, 1872

I have been studying the history of politics and power on this planet and in the universe for a little while now. And it occurs to me that a point keeps coming through in this material that deserves to be communicated:

Most power struggles are waged in secret.

We see the wars. We suffer from the economic collapses, the famines, the droughts.

But we never find out what’s really behind them all, because all that’s done in secret.

If one disagrees with how things are going, what’s wrong with standing up in public and stating so? That’s what our democratic system is all about, isn’t it?

Well, what’s wrong with it is that when a person stands up in public to protest, it’s like he’s just painted a huge target on his back, labelled “shoot me.” And if that protest has sufficiently missed a sufficiently violent withhold, the result is often exactly that: He is shut up.

Missed Withholds

This is a technical term; let me explain it:

An unspoken, unannounced transgression against a moral code by which the person is bound is called a “withhold.” …It is something that a person believes that if revealed will endanger his self-preservation. (from the Ethics book, p. 37.)

The decision to withhold comes after the decision to act. They are separate decisions, though in a criminal they are almost always made together.

A withhold is “missed” when someone almost finds out about it. That someone could be accusing someone else of something just to goad them. And they just happen to accuse them of something they actually did and want to keep secret. That misses the withhold just as well as if the police came to the door and announced their intention to investigate some crime.

Criminals love to miss withholds on regular folks. It almost always makes someone almost unbelievably angry to have a withhold missed on them. And this display of anger gives the criminal an excuse to hit back, even kill. The secret of why the killed person got so angry dies with them. The criminal depends on that.

(HCO Bulletin of 15 September 1981, The Criminal Mind)

The whole process of committing an overt (harmful act) withholding it, and then getting the withhold missed has a kind of physics connected with it. This physics has to do with the behavior of energy flows. An overt is basically an outflow of energy. The withhold serves to block further outflow, but this takes effort, which produces inflows. These inflows are then used as new excuses to outflow more overts. The being finds himself forced to attempt to keep his flows balanced, regardless of the consequences. Criminals are totally caught up in this physics, and have become the effect of it. They become totally unable to withhold overt acts by virtue of trying to keep them secret.

The thing to do with criminals is not to miss their withholds, but to hit the nail exactly on the head – totally exposing exactly what they did. This is difficult to do, but will be of the most benefit to society, and to the criminal.

However, in the rough-and-tumble game of international – or inter-galactic – politics, all the major players have lowered themselves to the level of criminal, and the game is generally played on those terms: Kill or be killed, and keep everything important a secret.

What Use Democracy?

Criminals were forced to agree to democracy in order to give those just below them in the “food chain” the impression that they could somehow have some control over who gets eaten.

I don’t claim that any great thinker has ever spoken these words. They are presented in perhaps an overly-cynical way. But we are playing this game with meat bodies, and meat bodies have to eat. Should we let the cows vote on which ones should go to the slaughterhouse?

Democracy gives the impression of civility in a society, and the impression of civility is highly valued. It tends to attract people to a society. In this wise, American culture was made very attractive to most of the rest of the world.

So now everyone else wants to live the way we do in the United States. I think that’s really all the Arab Spring was really about.

Except for one little detail…


The United States, since its Declaration of Independence, the writing of which we will celebrate tomorrow, envisioned a world in which the basic inalienable rights (or freedoms) of the citizen would be protected by his government, instead of trampled on.

In so doing, it proposed a system in which popular government would become separated from the secret power struggles of the criminal elites.

It failed, however, to fully expose those criminal elites and the full extent of their crimes.

And so, America was (rather quickly) re-criminalized.

The Declaration stands, though, as a testament to the basic human desire to be free.

There MUST be a way to make this vision real!

And there is:

Confront the truth.

Wise teachers from ancient times have been trying to tell us that this was our only way out. Many are familiar with the line in John which states that “the truth shall set you free.” John said that Jesus told this to a group of doubters, who said they were “sons of Abraham.” They thought they were free men, and had no need to be set free. So they did not try to understand the truth. Many of us continue to make this mistake.

I am not telling you that “the truth” is in the Bible!

The truth is what is really there! It should be possible to experience it, to know it as an individual without ever having to think about it or refer to a book.

So the biggest block to knowing the truth seems to be simply in our inability to perceive it. Thus, the road to truth is in the direction of improved perception.

I am not trying to be esoteric. I don’t want to hit anyone over the head with any sort of deep profundities. But don’t these ideas make some sort of sense?

Work out in what direction these ideas lead and you may be able to work out for yourself the path that will lead to advancement.

If you wish to go out and explore the truth for yourself, I invite you to stop reading here and go do that.

My take on The Truth

For those of you who did not leave to explore on your own, I will regale you with a few lines from my own story of exploration which may be instructive regarding the subjects of Democracy and Freedom.

First: It is not wrong to dream of freedom! Just remember what it takes to attain it.

Now: Have you ever experienced the idea that you were your body?

Is this a silly question? For some, the answer is: “Of course I’m my body!” Some cannot recall a time when they had the idea that they were NOT their body. Can you recall such a time? Were you your body before you were born? Will you be your body after you die? This is an example of an idea that is mere belief that acts as a trap, as a block to freedom. Because it’s a lie. You own your body. You are responsible for how it looks and what it does. But you are not your body.

Do you know how long it took me to realize this? I won’t even tell you; it is too embarrassing. But of course, this is just a stepping stone to freedom. How does one continue on up the road and prove this to oneself? By going exterior, preferably while fully awake and at cause. I don’t recommend trying to force yourself to do this. If you cannot do this naturally, there are probably good reasons why.

However, until one can go exterior and realize that he can still “see” and “hear” and “feel” and still control the body, the reality that greater freedom might be possible will be small.

Have I done this myself? Not with certainty, no. For me this truth still lies outside the realm of definite personal experience. But I have heard and read so many stories of such personal experiences that I cannot deny the truth of it just because my own certainty of it is low.

Have you ever seen for yourself, personally, the true shape of our planet (roughly spherical)? No? You mean you have not yet had a chance to ride through space with the astronauts? Well, then I guess we will just have to believe all those astronauts until we get up to the point where we can go up there and see for ourselves. (You can if you can learn to go exterior.)

I have spoken of secret criminals trying to run this planet. Is this true, or just stories I’ve heard? The answer to that question bears on the problem of Democracy.

I first heard of the criminal elites in, I think, 1982. I had been unaware of their existence up to that point. I was aware of various power blocks in society that were acting in rather underhanded ways. But not of the secret elites. LRH (L. Ron Hubbard) recorded a talk about them in 1967. I did not hear this talk until 1982. It is called Ron’s Journal 67. It is somewhat available, but you don’t need it now. Evidence of the existence of these elites is all over the internet. Thousands of people all around the world are totally certain they exist, and totally certain that they need to be removed. They have all but revealed themselves to us!

And they are still trying kill people who stand up to speak out against them. I am sure they reason: Well, that was his choice. If he wants to paint a target on his back, can you blame us for taking shots at it? They have sort of a warped point, don’t they?

The key to achieving Democracy is real freedom. Do the above lines make this point successfully? I wish they did. Democracy is not something you can expect the government or the military to simply provide to you. And it is not something you can “fight for” and “win.” It, or something like it, is a byproduct of a truly free society. And the freer a society is, the better it will operate.

A free society is made by making free beings. One at a time. In steps they can tolerate (being killed is a kind of “freedom”, but is not well tolerated!). Because it will require the strength of free beings to cope with the criminals. Until, some day, maybe, the criminals can also be freed. Until then there will be struggle. I’m sorry to have to tell you this. It seems to be how this game works.